Quick Updates: Duke Gregson / East End Connector
Two stories in the Herald-Sun today note some positive progress on improving 'our freeway problem' through central Durham. First, the DOT is belately willing to consider adding 'neck-downs' at intersections along Duke and Gregson Streets through Trinity Park. Unfortunately, DOT was not willing to listen to this reasonable proposal for traffic-calming and pedestrian protection in the past, or the pedestrian death that has ever-so-briefly opened their minds might have been averted. I would rather see Duke and Gregson converted to two-way traffic, which would also slow traffic speeds and also improve connectivity throughout central Durham. Hopefully, the 'neck-downs' will leave this option open.
Unfortunately, they are only to be done north of Trinity Ave. - while the densest concentration of population is along the Trinity Park portion of the corridor, the interesections with Chapel Hill St. and through Morehead Hills are equally beset with speeding traffic. In particular, the portion of Duke St. between the Freeway and Chapel Hill St. is 5 lanes wide, one-way, and traffic routinely comes off the freeway at 50-60 mph. and doesn't slow until they reach a red light.
Secondly, progress is being made in moving forward with the East End Connector. It is the hope of many people in central Durham that the EEC will relieve some traffic along our in-town north-south corridors. I don't think reduced traffic is the endpoint, though. The real boon would be to return the north-south corridors to their original width and configuration (two-way traffic). While DOT is entirely focused on relieving congestion (by widening roads - which, ultimately, fails,) there is a strong benefit to the community in improving connectivity. We'll see this on a small scale when Main and Chapel Hill St. are returned to two-way streets within the loop. It's a struggle to get DOT to appreciate this benefit, because their models do not account for it - they only count the cost of traffic delay.
This is the reason it is so difficult to derail business-as-usual in the Alston Avenue widening project. Pedestrian costs, neighborhood costs, and connectivity costs go uncounted in the DOT models. So if you ask for elimination of a dedicated right turn lane, the DOT runs a computer model, sees the "Level of Service" (which measures traffic delay) worsen, and deems the change unacceptable.
Posts
7 comments:
What's a "neck-down"?
Joe
I added a graphic to the post to demonstrate.
GK
Thanks!
I attended the EEC meeting at Living Waters Christian Community (right at Lynn Rd. and US 70, where the action would be). I had a chance to talk with both Mike Woodard and Mark Ahrendson, both of whom were there to listen. I made the point that as soon as the EEC gets approved and construction starts, we absolutely have to start kicking and screaming about Duke/Gregson, Mangum/Roxboro, Alston, Broad, and Hillandale, to get traffic calming and lower speed limits in pronto. If not, as you've noted, there will just be heavy traffic on the EEC *and* on the neighborhood streets, and growth will just expand to exploit the whole network. Both of them seemed to be receptive to that, and agreed. Mark noted that there's already some pushing in that direction from within the city staff, in that now that the EEC is going forward, DOT needs to drag its feet a lot less.
I also met Kevin Davis of bullcityrising.com there, and he made the good point that at some point the city should take these rights-of-way out of DOT control. It means we as the city would be on the hook for maintenance costs, which we haven't been terribly good at maintaining over the years. I still say the solution to that is new local funding options, such a (gasp!) a gas tax, or other targeted funding sources.
Michael
Good to know that you and Kevin were there to represent. I thought that the city was too quick to turn down DOT's offer to put the roads under city control. While I understand their trepidation at, which I think Mark Ahrendsen termed "a $500,000 paving bill," it is the only way to control our destiny in the long run. I think returning the streets to two-way will be a very effective first step, as it will not only slow traffic, but improve connectivity.
We have to continue to reiterate basic economics - some level of congestion is the equilibrium point between supply and demand. If it gets more congested, less people choose that route, time, etc. If it gets less congested (through widening, etc.) more people choose that route until it is congested again. Ignoring this simple truth is our national transportation delusion.
GK
thanks for this info here.
As well, I believe we need two ways to solve these problems and am putting my two cents into city council, state DOT officials, city trans. officials for what it is worth letting them know this is a top priority to me and others I know. I wish there was more one could do but hoping if they keep hearing something might happen.
Gary, in general a big thanks for this website/blog. Great job. My letterpress studio is on Foster Street (401) and I'm looking forward to when you head this way. I've had a hard time learning much on my few research forays into past of our building (I do know it was originally a rambler nash dealership).
Dave
Thanks for your nice comments about the blog - I'm glad that you've found it useful. I agree with you that the more voices speaking in chorus on this issue, the better. I think it is wise to hit mulitple venues as well.
I haven't looked at the whole Central Park area in great depth yet; within the photographic resources I know, there is minimal representation of that area. But I'll be keeping my eye out for pictures as I get closer to there, and I'll definitely let you know if I find one of 401 Foster.
GK
Post a Comment